[DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

I am wondering why the feature Detects as Evil isn't a 10 point disadvantage. It seems to me that if a PC detects as evil then the people in the town will know that the PC is either an evil cleric, unholy warrior or a half-infernal. All of the other classes and races do not detect as anything out of the ordinary. A PC who detects as evil can not disguise himself to a cleric or wizard with the spell. I used to play D&D and having a PC with an evil alignment has a lot of problems because many towns people will be suspicious and will often have ways to detect evil. Ravenloft would never work if the monsters didn't have a way to obscure their alignment either because detecting evil was one of the first things to be done when trying to find out who the bad guy is. The vast majority of people are neutral or unaligned morally so a person who detects as evil is able to be singled out.

The same is true of a person who detects as good. That PC will have a hard time infiltrating a temple dedicated to a demon lord or other areas of evil. Evil monsters can sniff out guy who radiate good pretty easily.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Social Stigma: Excommunicated is a 10 point disadvantage in any setting where it is supernaturally relevant.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Generally speaking, "being something that can be Detected" isn't worth points, because it's not actually obvious to someone without a special ability. To Detect Evil, someone has to purchase the Detect advantage, or put points into a Detect Evil spell - it's not obvious to someone without those traits. You can see this in other traits as well: you don't buy an "affected by True Faith" disadvantage, it's simply a 0-point feature, because the person with True Faith has to pay for it.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

I guess so but in a high powered game like DF detecting for evil/good is pretty routine.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

MY DF Cleric has Detect Evil as an advantage that doesn't cost anything, so I can do it whenever I want. I like to start off every session by using it on the party. The GM tells me, "Yep, the backstabbing thief, trained killer, and brutal monster you work with are still evil," and I proceed as normal because nobody has mind-controlled them.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

For 25 point ordinary townspeople? At any rate even if they know the character is "evil" he did get points for the reaction penalties when he took Social Stigma.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

No but the town guard has people who can do this because they often work with the church to keep the town safe from evil forces.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Most people in town aren't going to be equipped to detect that, and some towns are going to be actually run by the forces of evil.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Even so the guards are actually just reacting to the character's social stigma (and see the "Almost Monster" box in DF3 for how to abstract this), which is a disadvantage they already got points for.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Will your PC detect as evil if he is excommunicated? Being kicked out of the church is bad but being truly evil would be worse I would think.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

And for the same reasons as in D&D, acting only on the information it provides is asking for trouble. There is no unified "evil" (as there is no unified good), and you might not want to take all the factions at once. Your goals might momentarily align with some of them, even if you never directly help them. You're choosing what evil to deal with today, nothing else, so it's not choosing between two evils (Outside of DF, where it would be choosing between two evils, it makes for hard choices and interesting situations).

Also, nominally good creatures can be at odds with your goals, and simply trusting them because they register as good just makes your downfall faster.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

I assume you're talking about the 0-point feature that the Infernal race (from DF3) has?

It's because it's truly a wash. Yes, anyone who uses a Detect Evil ability is going to think you're horrible, but that's already covered by your Social Stigma. At the same time, most evil curses will avoid you as they target the Good Guys, you can bluff your way into negotiations with a demon ("Halt! By entering this room, you have signed your death war-- oh, didn't realize you were Hellspawn as well. How are things?"), and so on.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

It is possible that you only get excommunicated in a DF world because you have done something particularly evil. You have, at least, done something that the gods agree is bad enough that you get -3 on a divine intervention roll. That could stain your soul enough until you do penance sufficient to buy off the disad.

That is something that you would have to make a judgment call on, though. In my world Excommunication is something that goes on your permanent file in the records of Heaven and you have to work to get it removed. It pops up on Detect Evil scans because Heaven wants its servants to keep an eye on those kinds of people.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Social Stigma (Excommunicated) in the DF framework is always the -10-point supernatural kind – a note on your head from a deity, not merely a mortal church. Per DF 3, all evil clerics and unholy warriors must take this; it's the required disadvantage for the Unholy Might power. And Social Stigma (Infernal) includes Social Stigma (Excommunicated), as DF 3 explains; it's part of the birthright of any half-demon. What all this means is that regardless of your actions, which define whether you're small-e evil in the eyes of men, the sure sign of big-E Evil in the eyes of gods is Social Stigma (Excommunicated).

Social Stigma (Excommunicated) is worth -10 points because helpful clerical spells help you at -3, which is a pretty major drawback in a dungeon game where people get wounded many times a game session and the usual cure is . . . helpful clerical spells. Social Stigma (Infernal) is worth -15 points because it caps that off with -2 to reactions in polite social situations. There are clear game-mechanical drawbacks to being marked as a second-class citizen by the nice gods who support hospitals, organized society, and life in general.

The related 0-point feature "Functions and detects as Evil, regardless of true morality, whether this helps or hinders" is a double-edged sword; so is the very similar "Functions and detects as Good, regardless of true morality, whether this helps or hinders." These traits address not how cleric spells or reaction rolls go for you, but what tests you pass when tested supernaturally. Since being pranged harder by Evil but getting a bye from Good, or vice versa, comes out in the wash, that's 0 points.

The basic assumption in DF is that since most heroes want to be able to get healed and interact socially, they'll be neutral-to-good. Thus, being good isn't a disadvantage, but being evil has a Social Stigma. It isn't symmetrical. Whether someone without the Stigma tests as good has entirely to do with their actions . . . unless they're a celestial with that feature, in which case they get a bye no matter how lame they act.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

I imagine it's something like Reputation (among large population of good people) -1 [-10] and Reputaiton (among large population of evil people) +1 [10] that cancels out.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Umm.. an amulet of disguise alignment really isn't that hard to acquire....

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Or they don't exist at all.

False Aura doesn't have to be readily available. It also merely resists the Aura spell and isn't infallible.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

That depends on how you play evil guys. I still follow Gygax where evil guys fight endlessly against each other, like the rivalry between the demons lords Demogorgon and Orcus and Grazz't. AD&D had evil fight against each other almost as much as against good. In the Vault of the Drow, the house of Eilserv woshipped the Elder Eye and their leader Eclavdra tried to take over the drow from Lolth. So if you play Gygaxian style dungeon delving then being evil will not grant you any friends but will for sure grant you enemies from both the forces of good and rival evil factions.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Nah. The Evil guys are everyone's enemies anyway. Being Evil doesn't make them anymore your enemy, it just means you and they won't necessarily go out of your ways to antagonize each other unless necessary.

The Good guys have to tolerate the Evil guys unless the Evil guys do something evil in their area and they know about it. But then, they may have to go for Good guys of other political persuasions unless forced to band together by a serious Evil threat.

It really is pretty much a wash to be either Good or Evil.

Evil guys can do anything they want, pretty much. They'll just never have friends. Good guys have a more limited selection of actions, but may well have a lot more friends. Or not; lipping off to the local baron is a great way to find trouble, even if he is also Good.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

So does Social Stigma (excommunicated) make you detect as evil?

I don't see why being good isn't a disadvantage. I remember playing the Temple of Elemental Evil and our characters dressed in the temple robes so as to not attract attention as we worked our way through the dungeon. If one player had been a paladin or good cleric he would have given us away. Since most of the time you play is in a dungeon filled with evil things I feel detecting as good would be a big disadvantage.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

I didn't say that if your player was evil that other evil beings will single you out to attack you. I am saying that is you are evil other evil beings will be no more likely to be friendly than to a neutral person. A good person will likely be attacked.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Really? How often do you figure people use their Detect Good inside their own temple against their own personnel? I mean it's possible, sure, but I doubt it's S.O.P. every time you run into Bob from Accounting unless they are really running a tight ship.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

One thing I think is neat about the Detect ability in GURPS is that it comes with the ability to analyze with an IQ roll. So you don't only get to know the direction to the nearest source of evil, but you get to know some details as to what KIND of evil you are talking about.

Venial sinners can register differently from mortal sinners, excommunicated sinners, traffickers in dark powers, creatures of darkness and those tainted by such things.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Honesty, Sense of Duty, Charitable and so on are disadvantages.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Yes, but those would not give you away if you are in areas of evil. And yes monsters and evil clerics and unholy warriors will attempt to use this power or cast this spell on those they do not know because the forces good are one of the biggest problems for evil organizations. In some dungeons where the monsters are sitting in a room waiting to be killed this is not a problem but in dungeons where players have to infiltrate something like an evil temple being good is a problem. In most active dungeons (dungeons where the monsters and evil NPCs work together) it is almost suicide to attack head on because all of the forces of evil will attack at once. The best way to be in these types of dungeons is to keep a low profile and use guerilla tactics. Detecting as good will not allow you to keep a low profile IMO.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

What does Detect (Good) detect then if not characters with "good" traits?

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

It detects items and stuff imbued with good too. But I don't have a problem with this power itis just that a PC that detects as good is at a big disadvantage in a DF game. They have to find some way to obscure their goodness or they have to never interact with any of the NPCs or monsters that can detect good.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Would False Aura hide a person that detects as good? Could it make him/her detect as evil?

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

It boils down to an implicit but system-wide decision to disregard the phenomenon of Distinctive Feature, and treating it as some Quirk-magnitude thing, instead of looking at the true potential for inconvenience for the character.

I've gone a different route in Sagatafl, one more like that taken in Hero System, although in the actual case of Alignment (which works more like I believe it does in D&D4, than in previous editions, in that very few characters have Alignment[1]) the Distinctive Feature mechanic isn't used for it, because Alignment doesn't just make one detectable by supernatural means (e.g. a Sense Holiness Power), it also makes one vulnerable to certain attack types that are harmless when used against the unAligned, and makes one more vulnerable against other attack types, e.g. a Blessed Weapon that does double damage against Evil-Aligned targets.

(It may also make one vulnerable to certain beneficial effects of Powers from the opposed Alignment, although in some cases that doesn't make sense. It strikes me as very unChristian to be unable to heal a Satanist, for instance.)

As for GURPS, one thing you could do is look into the Noisy Limitation, and consider applying it to some Advantages, such as Power Investiture, Blessed and True Faith. It's not the way the RAW meant Noisy to be used, I'm fairly sure, and you should probably also halve the Limitation value of Noisy (IIRC there are two versions, -20% and -40%, so maybe halve those to -10% and -20%), because it can only be detected via supernatural means (Hero System has a similar rule for its Distinctive Feature, and this is implicit in Sagatafl as well).

This has the effect of making a character that has both Blessed and True Faith, as well as several levels of Power Investiture, very noisy indeed, but then again if someone has all of that, then he is a beacon of supernatural power, not entirely unlike the "Gandalf was here" scene from "Fellowship of the Ring".

In Sagatafl, I just treat Alignment as a seperate DisAdvantage, in six levels but with only the two lowest levels available to mortals, and with it being a prerequisite for Divine Powers. An ordinary priest or monk or hermit with some Divine Powers would (/should) have the first level, while a high-powered character like a Saint or Paladin should have the second level. Someone that is 1/8 angel might have the third level, and so forth.

(Someone with no Divine Powers can have either mortal level.)

So that's another option in GURPS. -5 CPs for the first level, -10 CPs for the second (I tend to dislike GURPS' pentophilia, but in this case I think -5/-10 CP are good values), and it becomes a legit DisAdvantage REquired Limitation on Powers (possibly even a mandatory one), with most normal Powers only being eligible for the -5 CP version, but some of the more extreme powers that I imagine are in DF11 (which I don't have yet) having the second level as a prerequisite (and therefore also being eligible for a -20% Power Limitation, vs a -15% Power Limitation on more normal Powers).

Except when this gets funky. Imagine you have a regular Healing Power gimped with all sorts of -10% gestures and -10% Incantations, and no Enhancements. That's clearly a low-level power, so it requires the -5 CP version of Alignment: Good, and is eligible for the -15% Power Limitation (-10% as per the RAW in DF, IIRC, and then another -5% because 1st level Alignment is required).

Then imagine a much more powerful version of Healing, with Gesturss and Incantations removed, and Enhanced with Ranged and a couple of levels of Reduced Fatigue Cost. That's clearly a strong power, so it requires the -10 CP version of Alignemnt: Good, and is eligible for the -20% Power Limitation.

But what happens if a character has the weak version, and upgrades to the strong version? Does the base Power, Healing -20% Gestures/Incantations also become eligible for the extra -5% Limitation? Or only the "add-ons"?

I can't see a clear answer. It's not a lot of points, either way. We're talking -5% on a base 30 CP Advantage. But I ascribe a high value to answers being clear. And obvious.


[1] And Sagatafl's Alignment rules have been in a state of flux anyway, for the last many years, in that Good vs Evil Alignment doesn't fit my Ärth setting at all, and I've been unsure what to use instead (e.g. different Alignment for Pagan Kelts vs Pagan Norsemen[1], or same?). Chances are I'll go with Divine, Infernal and Pagan, with no strong "vs" involved. Which, incidentally, might also work for GURPS DF, e.g. for Druids. If it isn't implicit already, in its distinction between Good, Evil, Bunny and Elder (Druids would be Bunny Alignment).

[2] ISTR you're working on a setting that is in some ways much like my Ärth setting.


PS. As for the Noisy Limitation, it could get strange, e.g. if a player also puts Noisy on his character's Energy Reserve. Then again, that Noisy would probably only apply when the character draws from the Energy Reserve, and you could get a fairly neat simulation of paganism if you slap some kind of Sacrifice Required Limitation onto Energy Reserve, in order to recharge it. (Which is one of the things that DF: Clerics failed to do.)

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

In my Ärth setting, if an Infernal creature, or an otherwise "evil" (whatever that means) creature who can Detect Alignment, encounters a Human who detects as having 2 levels of Good Alignment, then the creature is more likely to flee than to attack, on the assumption that the Human is some kind of butt-kicking Paladinic warrior, or a Saint with vast Divine Powers.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

In GURPS 4E, IIRC, the Detect Advantage can be given the Reflexive Enhancement, which means it is always on, requiring no conscious effort from the character who has it.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

They'd also have to shield their thoughts (Hey - you're planning to steal our loot! Kill them!), their emotions (Why do you feel hatred whenever I mention the Dark Lord?), and possibly hide their species (A human in our orc fortress! Kill him!).

Conversely, the "evil" dungeon dwellers need to scan not only for good, but also for thoughts & intentions, because conceivably someone who's evil or neutral might just as well be hostile.

Detect Good is just one way the PCs might show up, and from the pov of the bad guys, one of the more impractical ones.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Actually it probably ought to have no cost at all. Essentially what these sorts of things do for you is positively identify you, at which point whatever the actual reaction modifiers that apply when you are recognized as being part of a group should kick in. That is, having a distinctive feature is effectively a constraint on the frequency of recognition modifiers you can take on your social disadvantages.

There's more overloading on GURPS appearance type traits than there ideally would be. There are at least five separate kinds of things appearance can cover - that's beautiful/hideous, I want to/would never kiss that, that's a (insert group here), and that's him, the last two subdividing into disguise penalties and respectively triggers to Social Regard/Stigma and Reputation/identification by witnesses.

If you want to price Detects as Evil with an existing GURPS disadvantage, use Supernatural Features, which is broken in the same way - giving you points apparently in addition to your Social Stigma (monster) for making it recognizable without demanding a huge limit on that Social Stigma for usually concealed.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

I wish you'd try to explain that statement rather than dropping it in without doing anything to help people understand it. This is at least the third post, and none of those have actually said anything about what the "true potential" was.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

There's a lot of setting assumptions in b-dog's initial post, to be fair.



The answer to your original question (as I think has been said in this thread) is that GURPS doesn't give points for being subject to a power that humans aren't normally subject to, if someone else has to pay points for the power.

So, being summonable with various spells, detectable with specific forms of Detect, repelled by Faith, etc.; all zero-points, because the subject has to pay for them.

The assumption is that a) the majority of people won't have such powers, and b) someone who isn't subject to the things you are are may be subject to things you aren't. As in the previously-given example, my part-demon detects as Evil, which is a nuisance in a holy city, but less of an issue in a cultists' den, where my part-angel friend (who detects as Good) may get into more trouble than me.

To put the phenomenon in context, GURPS does give points for being vulnerable to something that people normally aren't, if someone else doesn't have to spend points for it. So having a malign aura that makes ordinary members of the public aware that you're evil, such that they implicitly mistrust and fear you, is worth points; being repelled by a normal cross that anyone could get their hands on is worth points.



But consider: Detect Evil really shouldn't be common. Partly, for balance reasons: a 25-point power is pretty rare by definition. A standard militia guardsman should be built on 50 or so points, and has about a dozen better things to spend his points on. The city militia may well work with the church, but you'd expect the militia to provide the muscle and the militia to provide the Detecty goodness. But also partly conceptually. This is the power of the very holy and pious. Think about it; in D&D 3e it's an at-will power of paladins - holy exemplars of pious goodness - and maybe a once-per-day spell of a typical cleric, and that's it. No-one else can do it. If it's everywhere, it loses any sense of being a gift from the gods and becomes as exciting and mystical as a barcode scanner.



That said, if - in your game - Detect Evil is extremely common, then by all means give points for being Evil. It's your game. If, basically, everyone can detect evil or has ready access to evil-detection, and people who detect as evil are automatically treated with fear and suspicion, then detecting as evil is a disadvantage. Go for it, and fill your boots. But that's reflecting your setting, not GURPS system.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Which are as rare as hen's teeth in DF canon. Seriously, read DF 1-11 and tell me how many times Detect (Good) comes up. It isn't assumed to be a common or innate ability for very many creatures at all. Actually, it's mainly an ability for clerics and (un)holy warriors, who might constitute a few percent of all foes, tops. Even demons and major undead lack this capability. Whereas Detect (Life) and Detect (Supernatural) are quite common . . . yet live people and supernatural beings don't get special disadvantage points for that.

I think it's important to accept that while DF was surely inspired in some ways by AD&D, it isn't that game. That game handed out Detect Good/Evil abilities like candy, making them free, unlimited-use B-list abilities acquired alongside actually useful gifts. DF does not assume this. It assumes rather the opposite: Few people can detect good or evil, which is how liches and demon lords can build entire dungeons and assemble vast armies without being noticed. Normally, detecting good or evil requires you to go to a specialist with holy powers . . . assuming he didn't spend his points on something more combat-oriented. The average dungeon, being devoid of light, food, pleasant company, etc. is mostly full of mouth-and-tentacles monsters that don't mind living in dirt, garbage, and piles of corpses, and even the average evil cleric is mostly served by low-IQ, low-Will thugs with no special powers.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

I'm not sure what your point is here.
**********************
However, I break it down as:

A Good person might be attacked by an Evil person...or not.

An Evil person might be attacked by a Good person...or not.

A Good person might be attacked by a Good person...or not.

An Evil person might be attacked by an Evil person...or not.

A Good person might be a valuable friend to a Good person...or not.

An Evil person won't be a valuable friend to an Evil person...although they might form a temporary alliance.

A Good person won't be a valuable friend to and Evil person...although they might form a temporary alliance.

And Evil person won't be a valuable friend to a Good person...although they might perform a temporary alliance.

A Good person has some restrictions on their actions.

An Evil person has no (or almost no) restrictions on their actions.

Those are all pretty much a wash. 0 points.

Being Detectable by someone else's power is always 0 points. No one gets points for being a human in a game where Detect Human powers/spells/eyesight exist. No one gets points for being a fish in a game where Detect Fish powers/spells/sonars exist.

Being Good or Evil isn't worth any points at all.

Now, being able to Detect Good or Evil is probably worth a goodly amount of points. I think someone mentioned 25 CPs for it? That's an expensive power (almost as much as Combat Reflexes) and should be worth a bunch in a campaign where it's allowed.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Incidentally, it's worth remembering that what Detect Evil detects is evil powers. One need not actually be evil to have evil powers, although that will usually be the case.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Can we get a page number on that? I only see Detect Evil and Resistant to Evil
Supernatural Powers and nothing that clarifies that the first only has an effect on powers.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Detect works fine on beings, powers, and artifacts . . . everything. The build in DF uses the 20-point level of Detect as its basis. Roughly, you'd get:

Detect (A particular class of evil artifacts) [5]
Detect (A particular class of evil beings) [5]
Detect (A particular class of evil powers) [5]

. . . all by analogy to "gold," "sorceresses," and "fire magic."

Detect (All evil artifacts) [10]
Detect (All evil beings) [10]
Detect (All evil powers) [10]

. . . all by analogy to "precious metal," "spellcasters," and "magic." In other words, "evil" is viewed as equivalent in size to "magic." At higher levels, you have to broaden the scope:

Detect (All evil artifacts, beings, and powers) [20]

Detect (All morally charged artifacts, beings, and powers) [30]

What's more important, though, is how rare this ability is. Knowing good from evil on sight is what gods do. They occasionally lend it out to clerics. Just about nobody else can do this. In particular, it's customary in mythology that the very pride that leads to demons, undead, and other affronts obscures such beings' ability to know good from evil. They are bad candidates for such advantages. And the unintelligent and mook-level beings that constitute 99% of foes in DF all lack divine powers, too.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

But if an undead or demon is repelled by holy symbols or damaged by holy water wouldn't they be able to sense or detect good near them. Otherwise they could pick up something holy by accident and then get burned.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Sucks to be them then, doesn't it.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Happens all the time in movies...

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

If they're repelled by holy items, then they know an item is holy as soon as they get repelled by it. And a demon who gets burned by holy stuff might be reluctant to touch crosses.

Incidentally, I get burned by hot oven plates myself, and yet I rarely touch them by accident.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Indeed. Supernatural evil things are SUPPOSED to unexpectedly get burned by holy things that they didn't know were holy. They are SUPPOSED to get the short end of the cosmic stick.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

If you bought "Dected Hot Oven Plates" at character creation, you wouldn't have that problem.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

"Boy, I sure would like to have a glass of nice cold water after a long day of terrorizing the land. Why here is a flask of water that the holy warrior I killed had in his possession; I'll just open it and take a big swig of that refreshing water....ahhhhhh it burns it burrrrrnssss."

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

If you give your demons IQ 8, Overconfidence, and Cannot Learn, they get what's coming for them.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Not having Detect Good on your character sheet isn't the same thing as having Gullible or something similar. You can't make a parallel between lacking a supernatural sense and being a moron.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

To someone who holy water would act as corrosive, I would think the mere vapors would cause alarm. Just like if you opened a bottle of strong acid, the vapors would give you pause.

Similarly, holy symbols would have a heat to them the bad guy could sense a few feet away.

It would be a little strange that the holy items are just inert until contact is made with the enemy. I would almost say such items would have to be specifically designed that way, at greater expense to pull that off that allows them to have a triggered effect rather then some passive nature.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Too bad for them. I can't detect that the colorless fluid in the puddle is a deadly contact poison or that the white powder in the villain's sugar jar is arsenic, and I can't see gamma rays. All of these are bad for me. Threats don't come with the implied insurance of knowledge. Natural things might sharpen their senses over time; unnatural ones just are.

Remember that what harms undead or whatever isn't the object but the faith of the person who blessed it and/or is wielding it, being directed actively to the cause of blessing or turning undead. A cleric just standing there doesn't burn or turn vampires. He's just a guy standing there. He has to turn on the holy headlights to affect the undead. He might do so directly, or he might need a fetish that perhaps he can hand to a friend. Either way, it's the act of will and not the person or the item in itself that hurts evil beings.

Undead "detect" these things when some nut comes at them, shaking holy water or brandishing a doodad, and shouting an abjuration. They "detect" these things when the harm happens. What they "detect" is roughly equivalent to pain from injury or fear from threats. The person behind the object is needed for the object to be harmful or threatening, though. Obviously, a non-moron evil guy can avoid things that might be used this way, just as I don't drink random liquids and eat random solids that sort of resemble food. This isn't the same as detection.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

b-dog, it sounds as if your objective is to make demons and evil creatures virtually impossible to kill — that is, detect Good beings on sight, detect any and every threat to their being from a great distance away, and so on.

If that's your world setting, so be it, but that's not the way DF seems to be designed.Cf, "Attack of the the Eye Creatures."

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Only if the vapors are holy as well. In which case a unholy being with that vulnerability which breaths would notice a stinging sensation in his nose or throat as he inhales. But radiation and poison can kill someone with no sensation at all.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

True.

It really comes down to how the stuff works in someone's particular world.

If the (un)holy objects have sensory effects to their enemies or not is a optional setting toggle.

In same scenario, the trigger for a holy symbol erupting in undead burnination could be the deity saying "no, mine! hands off!" or the collective subconscious of the believers or it could be like Kromm described, only empowered by the user and just sit idly otherwise.

As far as the original topic... I don't think DF-styled games (D&D included) revolve around subtly sneaking into dungeons... at least not as their main focus. DF is not Shadowrun. So having a good/bad stink about you that is only detectable by special powers isn't a big deal...

If your campaign is heavy into that whole shadowrun-styled subtly business of sneaking into dungeons and/or macking on succubi, consider allowing those who have the 'stink' to take appropriate disadvantages... supernatural features or whatever... and play those out appropriately. Having a hidden ethical identifier on you seems like a zero-sum trait with good and bad side effects. Like any traits, depending on circumstances of the setting, the down or up sides could vary independent of each other.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

If they're not, you could theoretically distill the holiness out of the water... just saying. ;)

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

You make water holy in the first place by boiling the Hell out of it, so there is precedent.


heh.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

In fact, in some Catholic formulations, boiling, freezing, mixing, etc. deconsecrate the water. There are even theologians who would argue that throwing it at someone/something would do this, and that holy water retains its holiness only in the hands of a true believer who treats it with respect. Given that the Catholic model is where fantasy holy water comes from, the GM would be within his rights to say that only clerics can use the stuff, and that even then there's some Religious Ritual roll at -n needed to do anything but shake it from an aspergillum or peacefully dab it onto someone.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Sadly, holiness is not a conserved quality.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Yes. I have played AD&D and I still tend to think in those terms. In the Monster Manuel it says that demons are repelled by holy (good) artifacts and relics. So I guess I just assume that if a demon is repelled by a PC or item that they would be able assume the PC or item is imbued wiuth the force of good.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Yes, they know when they are being True Faithed. But merely "detects as Good" won't do that.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

"My Detect Fire ability is detecting fire!"

"You aren't Detecting Fire, you are ON FIRE!"

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

That's pretty much exactly how canonical DF Evil guys detect Good things that can hurt them . . . the same way DF knights detect swords: by getting hit upside the head by them.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Whats the point value of Detect Sword Blow (range: contact sword of belligerent foe)?

:D

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

30 points, very common. It is at that level because most GMs will instinctively try to destroy a character with that on their character sheet. It is a natural law.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

In my campaign, I'll give you 5 points for a Vow to stand there and let foes hit you so you can detect them before you hit back. ;)

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

I think that would be a major delusion. "My secret technique is to absorb my enemy's might by letting them strike first."

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

You are not the first to have that idea. : )

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Well I got dog-piled for asking about detects as evil. But I still say in my defense, there is no setting or cosmology for DF so I still think in AD&D terms where almost all of the major monsters, especially magical ones, have the Know Alignment power so I felt that a person who detects as evil or good in this world would be at a big disadvantage. But the way it stands now with very few people being able to detect good or evil it makes gaming better because being able to tell if a person is good or evil really pigeon-holes them. "Do we attack this person/monster?" "Yes, his/its alignment is chaotic evil!"

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

GURPS doesn't have (or need, or even want) Alignments.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

DF sure as heck does.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Does it? It has Holy and Unholy Powers built as Pacts, I don't think that's at all the same thing. For one thing it only applies to the those characters that have those powers rather than something all characters have.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Good-Evil and Bunnies-Squid are more allegiances than they are alignments. You can develop a "moral charge" from them, but that is more a supernatural taint than it is some sort of cosmic sorting hat.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

A distinction I totally fail to comprehend.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

In D&D being a soldier of Heaven means that you are more than likely a pretty decent guy because you are Something Good. Even if you are kind of a jerk, you basically are a jerk with a heart of gold.

In GURPS DF being a soldier of Heaven has no such promise. A Holy Warrior is on the side of the angels, but can easily be (even with templates) under no obligation to be any better than a puppy kicking mercenary who scares children.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

Conversely, it's not clear, at least not to me, that DF Detect Evil will trigger if you are the sort of puppy kicking mercenary who dismembers children and feeds them to the puppies, as long as you haven't actually acquired a power from an evil source.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

I don't remember it that way. It may have been a little more common than in the default GURPS DF but that's about it. 'Just sayin'.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

In D&D (up until 4th edition anyway) everybody has an alignment, in GURPS only people with certain Holy or Unholy Powers or rare creatures with an appropriate feature detect as good or evil.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

True. But I think this is actually an argument in favor of it costing something. Certain supernatural effects work differently on you than the do on normal people is certainly the kind of thing that should cost points. This might more or less cancel out - you can be detected or warded against, but on the other hand sometimes being detectable is a benefit, and there are likely to be useful magical gizmos that only work for suitably good or evil characters - but if for some reason it doesn't in your particular setting - say every town faithful to the Good God is warded by an impenetrable barrier against evil - you'll need to adjust it.

In most settings, I think most of these are probably a Perk. And by no means limited to Good and Evil. There's no particular reason a shaman couldn't magically Aligned as their totem Animal (Animal Control effects works on you, spells designed for humans don't), or necromancers be treated as undead (things with orders to kill all mortals will ignore you, but watch out for Slay Undead effects). As long as the benefits and drawbacks are close to balanced.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

In actual play, the effects are very much +N for "treated nicely by things of my moral leaning," "can wield nifty items and powers limited to people of my moral leaning," and, "not fried by curses and traps that trigger on moral leanings other than my own," but -N for "treated like dirt by things of the opposite moral leaning," "can't wield nifty items and powers biased against my moral leaning," and, "fried by curses and traps that trigger on my moral leaning." That sums to 0 points. However, I often treat zeroes as ones and call such things perks, because by being careful and playing your cards right, you can somewhat avoid the downsides and somewhat increase the odds of seeing the upsides.

Re: [DF] Why isn't Detects as Evil more of a disadvantage?
 

That might be better called,"Detects as demonic." That quality is generally given to ringwraiths, vampires, etc. An evil person isn't generally given these unless his evil includes consorting with said creatures.

Which makes for an interesting idea. What if someone's loved one has been kidnapped by a Creature of the Night, and he had to go and negotiate for the release. On the way back the Creature's aura would rub off on him for a time, and other people would be afraid of him.